Correction to: Economic evaluation of advanced practice physiotherapy models of care: a systematic review with meta-analyses.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lafrance S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8915506 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Correction to: Economic evaluation of advanced practice physiotherapy models of care: a systematic review with meta-analyses.
Lafrance Simon S Demont Anthony A Thavorn Kednapa K Fernandes Julio J Santaguida Carlo C Desmeules François F
BMC health services research 20220310 1
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe objective of this systematic review is to appraise evidence on the economic evaluations of advanced practice physiotherapy (APP) care compared to usual medical care.MethodsSystematic searches were conducted up to September 2021 in selected electronic bibliographical databases. Economic evaluation studies on an APP model of care were included. Economic data such as health care costs, patient costs, productivity losses were extracted. Methodological quality of included studies was assessed with the Effective Public Health Practice Project tool and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Meta-analyses were performed and mean differences (MD) in costs per patient were calculated using random-effect inverse variance models. Certainty of the evidence was assessed with the GRADE Approach.ResultsTwelve studies (n = 14,649 participants) including four randomized controlled trials, seven analytical cohort studies and one economic modeling study were included. The clinical settings of APP models of care included primary, emergency and specialized secondary care such as orthopaedics, paediatrics and gynaecology. The majority of the included participants were adults with musculoskeletal disorders (n = 12,915). Based on low quality evidence, health system costs including salaries, diagnostic tests, medications, and follow-up visits were significantly lower with APP care than with usual medical care, at 2 to 12-month follow-up (MD: - 145.02 €/patient; 95%CI: - 251.89 to - 38.14; n = 7648). Based on low quality evidence, patient costs including travel and paid medication prescriptions, or treatments were significantly higher with APP care compared to usual medical care, at 2 to 6-month follow-up (MD: 22.18 €/patient; 95%CI: 0.40 to 43.96; n = 1485). Based on very low quality evidence, no significant differences in productivity losses per patient were reported between both types of care (MD: 450 €/patient; 95%CI: - 80 to 970; n = 819).ConclusionsThis is the first systematic review and meta-analysis on the economic evaluation of APP models of care. Low quality evidence suggests that APP care might result in lower health care costs, but higher patient costs compared to usual medical care. Costs differences may vary depending on various factors such as the cost methodology used and on the clinical setting. More evidence is needed to evaluate cost benefits of APP models of care.
| S-EPMC8579553 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the implementation of an advanced practice physiotherapist (APP) clinic in our paediatric institution and assess APP and orthopaedic surgeon satisfaction.MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, all patient records from the APP clinic's second year (March 2017 to March 2018) at CHU Sainte-Justine were reviewed. These were compared with the records of patients seen by orthopaedic surgeons within the gait clinic the year before implementing the clinic. The following data were collected: demographic, professional issuing referral, reason for referral, consultation delay, clinical impression, investigation, and treatment plan. We also documented every subsequent follow-up to rule out any diagnostic change and identify surgical patients. Clinician satisfaction was assessed by the Minnesota Satisfaction and PROBES Questionnaires along with a short electronic survey.ResultsFour hundred and eighteen patients were assessed by APPs and 202 by orthopaedic surgeons. APPs managed patients independently in 92.6% of cases. Nearly 86% of patients were discharged following the initial visit, and 7.4% were referred to a physiotherapist. Only 1% of APP patients eventually required surgery compared with nearly 6% in the orthopaedic group. The mean waiting time for consultation was greater in the APP group (513.7 versus 264 days). However, there was a significant reduction in mean waiting time over the last 3 months surveyed (106.5 days).ConclusionsThe feedback from all clinicians involved was positive, with a greater mean score on the Minnesota Satisfaction and PROBES Questionnaire for APPs. The APP gait clinic appears to be an effective triage clinic.Level of evidenceIII.
| S-EPMC9291344 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionRecent colorectal cancer screening studies focus on optimizing adherence. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of interventions using electronic health records (EHRs); automated mailings; and stepped support increases to improve 2-year colorectal cancer screening adherence.MethodsAnalyses were based on a parallel-design, randomized trial in which three stepped interventions (EHR-linked mailings ["automated"]; automated plus telephone assistance ["assisted"]; or automated and assisted plus nurse navigation to testing completion or refusal [navigated"]) were compared to usual care. Data were from August 2008 to November 2011, with analyses performed during 2012-2013. Implementation resources were micro-costed; research and registry development costs were excluded. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were based on number of participants current for screening per guidelines over 2 years. Bootstrapping examined robustness of results.ResultsIntervention delivery cost per participant current for screening ranged from $21 (automated) to $27 (navigated). Inclusion of induced testing costs (e.g., screening colonoscopy) lowered expenditures for automated (ICER=-$159) and assisted (ICER=-$36) relative to usual care over 2 years. Savings arose from increased fecal occult blood testing, substituting for more expensive colonoscopies in usual care. Results were broadly consistent across demographic subgroups. More intensive interventions were consistently likely to be cost effective relative to less intensive interventions, with willingness to pay values of $600-$1,200 for an additional person current for screening yielding ≥80% probability of cost effectiveness.ConclusionsTwo-year cost effectiveness of a stepped approach to colorectal cancer screening promotion based on EHR data is indicated, but longer-term cost effectiveness requires further study.
| S-EPMC4441758 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPediatric intensive care units (PICUs) are increasingly staffed with advanced practice providers (APPs), supplementing traditional physician staffing models.ObjectivesWe evaluate the effect of APP-inclusive staffing models on clinical outcomes and resource utilization in US PICUs.Research designRetrospective cohort study of children admitted to PICUs in 9 states in 2016 using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's State Inpatient Databases. PICU staffing models were assessed using a contemporaneous staffing survey. We used multivariate regression to examine associations between staffing models with and without APPs and outcomes.MeasuresThe primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included odds of hospital acquired conditions and ICU and hospital lengths of stay.ResultsThe sample included 38,788 children in 40 PICUs. Patients admitted to PICUs with APP-inclusive staffing were younger (6.1±5.9 vs. 7.1±6.2 y) and more likely to have complex chronic conditions (64% vs. 43%) and organ failure on admission (25% vs. 22%), compared with patients in PICUs with physician-only staffing. There was no difference in mortality between PICU types [adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83-1.81, P=0.30]. Patients in PICUs with APP-inclusive staffing had lower odds of central line-associated blood stream infections (AOR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.59-0.98, P=0.03) and catheter-associated urinary tract infections (AOR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.61-0.86, P<0.001). There were no differences in lengths of stay.ConclusionsDespite being younger and sicker, children admitted to PICUs with APP-inclusive staffing had no increased odds of mortality and lower odds of some hospital acquired conditions compared with those in PICUs with physician-only staffing. Further research can inform APP integration strategies which optimize outcomes.
| S-EPMC8187846 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDespite the increased deployment and added value of Advanced Practitioner Physiotherapy (APP) in musculoskeletal care internationally, APP is not yet widely accepted within Dutch primary care. This may be due to specific constraints in the implementation of APP within the Dutch healthcare system. This study aimed to explore the experiences and perceptions of Advanced Practitioner Physiotherapists (APPs) and General Practitioners (GPs) with respect to implementing APP within Dutch primary care.MethodsThis explorative and interpretive qualitative study included 12 APPs and 3 GPs who were in various stages of implementing an APP care model. Semi-structured interviews were conducted between January and March 2021. The topic list was based on existing literature, the personal input of researchers, and the Constellation Approach framework. Data were analysed using a thematic inductive approach.ResultsFour main themes emerged from the data; 1) Both GPs' trust in APP and a clear added value of APP are critical for starting implementation, 2) APPs need continuous support from GPs, 3) APPs believe that their position needs strengthening, and 4) Implementation of the APP model creates tension over ownership. These four themes highlight the perceived difficulties in gaining trust, lack of clarity over the added value of APP, ambiguity over APPs' professional profile and positioning, a need on behalf of GPs to maintain authority, lack of reimbursement structure, and the struggle APPs face to strike a balance with current care.ConclusionThis study demonstrates that implementing an APP model of care is challenging, in part, because the deployment of APP does not sufficiently align with the core values of GPs, while GPs appear reluctant to hand over control of elements of patient care to APPs. APPs do not appear to have ownership over the implementation, given their strong dependence on the practice, values and needs of GPs.Trial registrationEthical approval was obtained from the Medical Ethics Committee of VU University Medical Centre in Amsterdam; reference number 2020.17 . All participants were asked to provide written informed consent prior to participating in the study.
| S-EPMC9026935 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceDuring COVID-19, Singapore simultaneously experienced a dengue outbreak, and acute hospitals were under pressure to lower bed occupancy rates. This led to new models of care to treat patients with acute, low-severity medical conditions either at home, in a hospital-at-home (HaH) model, or in a clinic-style setting sited at the emergency department in an ambulatory care team (ACT) model, but a reliable cost analysis for these models is lacking.ObjectiveTo compare personnel costs of HaH and ACT with inpatient care.Design, setting, and participantsIn this economic evaluation study, time-driven activity-based costing was used to compare the personnel cost of inpatient care with treating dengue via HaH and treating chest pain via ACT. Participants were patients with nonsevere dengue and chest pain unrelated to a coronary event admitted via the emergency department to the internal medicine service of a tertiary hospital in Singapore.ExposuresHaH for dengue and ACT for chest pain.Main outcomes and measuresA process map was created for the patient journey for a typical patient with each condition. The amount of time personnel spent on delivering care was estimated and the cost per minute determined based on their wages in 2022. The total cost of care was calculated by multiplying the time spent by the per-minute cost of the personnel resource and summing all costs.ResultsCompared with inpatient care, HaH used 50% less nursing time (418 minutes, 95% uncertainty interval [UI], 370 to 465 minutes) but 80% more medical time (303 minutes, 95% UI, 270 to 338 minutes) per case of dengue. If implemented nationally, HaH would save an estimated 56 828 SGD per year (95% UI, -169 497 to 281 412 SGD [US $41 856; 95% UI, -$124 839 to $207 268]). The probability that HaH is cost saving was 69.2%. Compared with inpatient care, ACT used 15% less nursing time (296 minutes, 95% UI, 257 to 335 minutes) and 50% less medical time (57 minutes, 95% UI, 46 to 69 minutes) per case of chest pain. If implemented nationally, ACT would save an estimated 1 561 185 SGD per year (95% UI, 1 040 666 to 2 086 518 SGD [US $1 149 862; 95% UI, $766 483 to $1 536 786]). The probability that ACT is cost saving was 100%.Conclusions and relevanceThis economic evaluation found that the HaH and ACT models decreased the overall personnel cost of care. Reorganizing hospital resources may help hospitals reap the benefits of reduced hospital-acquired infections, improved patient recovery, and reduced hospital bed occupancy rates.
| S-EPMC10517377 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAdvanced practice physiotherapy (APP) models of care where physiotherapists are primary contact emergency department (ED) providers are promising models of care to improve access, alleviate physicians' burden, and offer efficient centered patient care for patients with minor musculoskeletal disorders (MSKD).ObjectivesTo compare the effectiveness of an advanced practice physiotherapist (APPT)-led model of care with usual ED physician care for persons presenting with a minor MSKD, in terms of patient-related outcomes, health care resources utilization, and health care costs.MethodsThis trial is a multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) with a cost analysis. Six Canadian EDs (clusters) will be randomized to a treatment sequence where patients will either be managed by an ED APPT or receive usual ED physician care. Seven hundred forty-four adults with a minor MSKD will be recruited. The main outcome measure will be the Brief Pain Inventory Questionnaire. Secondary measures will include validated self-reported disability questionnaires, the EQ-5D-5L, and other health care utilization outcomes such as prescription of imaging tests and medication. Adverse events and re-visits to the ED for the same complaint will also be monitored. Health care costs will be measured from the perspective of the public health care system using time-driven activity-based costing. Outcomes will be collected at inclusion, at ED discharge, and at 4, 12, and 26 weeks following the initial ED visit. Per-protocol and intention-to-treat analyses will be performed using linear mixed models with a random effect for cluster and fixed effect for time.DiscussionMSKD have a significant impact on health care systems. By providing innovative efficient pathways to access care, APP models of care could help relieve pressure in EDs while providing efficient care for adults with MSKD.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05545917 . Registered on September 19, 2022.
| S-EPMC9900999 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveIn response to concerns about patient care and safety, our urban, tertiary care, Level 1 trauma center adult emergency department (ED) created an advanced practice provider-staffed critical care step-down unit (CCSU). We conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the CCSU's impact on patient care, safety, and ED operations.MethodsWe compared ED length of stay, return visits to the ED within 72 hours, billing code assignments (current procedural terminology evaluation and management [CPT E&M] codes), and quality of electronic health record documentation per QNOTE for the 2 years after the CCSU was initiated (CCSU period) versus before its initiation (pre-CCSU period).ResultsThere were 31,418 critical care ED patient visits in the pre-CCSU period and 33,396 in the CCSU period. Median ED length of stay did not change overall between the CCSU versus pre-CCSU period (∆1 [95% confidence interval (CI) = -2.4, 4.4] minutes), but decreased for patients who remained in the critical care suites (∆-4 [95% CI = -7.8, -0.2] minutes). 72-hour return ED visits also did not change overall (∆0% [95% CI = -0.1, 0]), but decreased for patients who remained in the critical care suites (∆0.4% [95% CI = -0.05, -0.4]). CPT E&M billing increased for highest-level visits (99,291: ∆1.3% [95% CI= 0.5, 2.0]). Quality of electronic health record documentation as measured by QNOTE also improved (∆11.5% [95% CI = 4.9, 18.1]).ConclusionThis ED's CCSU performance metrics indicate at least moderate improvement in ED length of stay, 72-hour return visits, critical care patient billing, and electronic health record documentation. EDs elsewhere can consider implementation of this advanced practice provider-staffed solution to improvement in critical care in ED.
| S-EPMC7493497 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInterventions designed to narrow the gap between research findings and clinical practice may be effective, but also costly. Economic evaluations are necessary to judge whether such interventions are worth the effort. We have evaluated the economic effects of a tailored intervention to support the implementation of guidelines for the use of antihypertensive and cholesterol-lowering drugs. The tailored intervention was evaluated in a randomized trial, and was shown to significantly increase the use of thiazides for patients started on antihypertensive medication, but had little or no impact on other outcomes. The increased use of thiazides was not expected to have an impact on health outcomes.Methods and findingsWe performed cost-minimization and cost-effectiveness analyses on data from a randomized trial involving 146 general practices from two geographical areas in Norway. Each practice was randomized to either the tailored intervention (70 practices; 257 physicians) or control group (69 practices; 244 physicians). Only patients that were being started on antihypertensive medication were included in the analyses. A multifaceted intervention was tailored to address identified barriers to change. Key components were an educational outreach visit with audit and feedback, and computerized reminders. Pharmacists conducted the visits. A cost-minimization framework was adopted, where the costs of intervention were set against the reduced treatment costs (principally due to increased use of thiazides rather than more expensive medication). The cost-effectiveness of the intervention was estimated as the cost per additional patient being started on thiazides. The net annual cost (cost minimization) in our study population was 53,395 US dollars, corresponding to 763 US dollars per practice. The cost per additional patient started on thiazides (cost-effectiveness) was 454 US dollars. The net annual savings in a national program was modeled to be 761,998 US dollars, or 540 US dollars per practice after 2 y. In this scenario the savings exceeded the costs in all but two of the sensitivity analyses we conducted, and the cost-effectiveness was estimated to be 183 US dollars.ConclusionsWe found a significant shift in prescribing of antihypertensive drugs towards the use of thiazides in our trial. A major reason to promote the use of thiazides is their lower price compared to other drugs. The cost of the intervention was more than twice the savings within the time frame of our study. However, we predict modest savings over a 2-y period.
| S-EPMC1472698 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPhysiotherapists (PTs) working in primary care settings within an interprofessional team can lead to favourable health outcomes and decreased burden on the healthcare system. Although PT models of care are important to primary care delivery, there is a lack of knowledge and evidence on the characteristics of these models of care, the differences and similarities between the models, and the barriers and facilitators to implementing these models. This scoping review protocol aims to fill this knowledge gap by synthesizing the evidence and characteristics of models of care that integrate physiotherapists within primary care teams, mapping the similarities and differences, and describing barriers and facilitators to implementing models of care that integrate physiotherapists within primary care teams.MethodsThe scoping review is based on the Joanne Briggs Institute (JBI) framework. It is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRIMSA-ScR). A comprehensive search strategy will be used to find relevant papers in six databases: OVID MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus. Grey literature will be searched through OpenGrey, Theses Global, ProQuest Dissertation, and Google Scholar. Quantitative and qualitative study designs will be included, with two reviewers independently selecting each article on Covidence. Data will be extracted using a pre-piloted data extraction sheet and synthesized narratively to identify themes and patterns.DiscussionThis scoping review will synthesize the evidence on models of care that integrate physiotherapists within primary care teams. It will provide evidence to inform the implementation of these models of care and identify research gaps that need to be addressed. The protocol is registered on Open Science Framework registries at https://osf.io/kh83r/.
| S-EPMC11620590 | biostudies-literature